Update: upon releasing my first statement, I was informed that my reason for being kicked wasn’t what I said, but rather the fact that I didn’t say it to Ghost personally. I can understand this concept, but it isn’t without its own brand of hypocrisy and underhanded foolishness. Put simply, what I said was being described as “gossip” by those who denounced me for my first statement, and the fact that I didn’t say it to Ghost personally was the true reason for me being banned. I can quite easily refute this theory pushed by those from the inner circle with the very clip played on radio graffiti. The clip in question includes me saying “You can tell Ghost I said this” which implies that I didn’t wish the statement to remain secret, refuting any claims that it was malicious gossip. Now I have brought Ghost’s reading and listening comprehension into question on numerous occasions before the formation of the inner circle, but it goes without saying that there is a clear line between someone expressing concern and someone gossiping, and I believe Ghost knows this but choses to ignore it since without the idea that I was somehow gossiping, that only leaves the alternative reason.

Now to make it clear, I had no intentions of returning as I follow the belief that people don’t change, and that only change itself can change people. So, to those from the inner circle who keep telling me that if I was a good boy who kept my mouth shut, I’d be let back in, seem to be missing the point. I’ve been monitoring the inner circle for months; I’ve learnt that people within the inner circle are quick to fall in line with the social norm of the group, so even if I didn’t write a statement and remained silent on the issue, I would’ve still been viewed with scorn and hatred by those too entrenched in the idea that I was banned for the sole reason that I was “gossiping.”

It should also be said to those calling me “entitled” as they don’t seem to follow my position here, or outright refuse to listen to what I’m saying. I was let in for free, I understand Ghost’s reasoning for allowing my presence (and it isn’t because he enjoyed my commentary and dialog, but we’ll get into that later if needs be) but keep in mind that I’ve always been critical of the idea of any social group organised by Ghost based on previous events. I didn’t stay in the group because I wanted attention or the approval of Ghost, I stayed because I knew that it wouldn’t be long until doxing would become the norm as a cowardly tool of intimidation towards those who speak out against Ghost and his following. The accepted statements from Ghost over the last few weeks included him mentioning that he holds the names and details of those who purchased his memorabilia, and can use them against anyone he pleases. This is not only highly objectionable from a moral standpoint, but is also objectionable from a legal standpoint, which speaks magnitudes about Ghost’s disregard for consumer standards and privacy laws, and yes, this is a legitimate violation of both. Why do you think any leak from the inner circle is taken so seriously, does a two-hour convocation about the difference between transsexuals and crossdressers require confidentiality, or is Ghost worried that people may start learning of his underhanded schemes?

I can say right now with confidence that my writing will be my only course of action when questioning the inner circle’s motives. Though his last paragraph will surely be ignored when the decision is made to silence me through doxing and personal attacks (and I presume there’s already several people working on that now) but it’ll only further prove me right.